Delta Farm Press recently reported that America’s Farmers Grow Ag Leaders is now launching in 40 states, with more than $500,000 worth of scholarships available. Sponsored by the Monsanto Fund, the program provides $1,500 college scholarships to students pursuing a degree related to agriculture.

Starting Nov. 15, high school seniors and college students in eligible states can apply for this opportunity. Farmers know the rewards of a career in agriculture, but many of today’s youth may not. Luckily, there is an abundance of evidence that agriculture is a smart career choice. According to  USDA, nearly 55,000 jobs in agriculture are available every year. Many of the nation’s largest land-grant institutions, such as Penn State and Texas A&M University, report job placement rates above 90 percent for their ag students
.
Grow Ag Leaders helps engage future generations in agriculture by raising awareness of the broad range of career opportunities in the industry and by supporting their college education.

The program was created in response to farmer requests to keep rural youth involved in agriculture. Farmers can participate in the program by encouraging students in their community to apply for a scholarship and by endorsing their application.

Because farmers play a crucial role in the industry, each applicant is required to obtain endorsements from at least three local farmers. “We want to encourage ambitious and talented students to pursue careers in this growing field,” said Elizabeth Vancil, Youth and Community Outreach manager at Monsanto.

“As students who grew up in rural areas learn more about what agriculture has become, they are realizing that it is a fascinating, hi-tech industry, with job growth, job security, and high wages,” Vancil said. “These young people are seeing that there are emerging opportunities for a new generation of innovative young farmers, engineers, implement designers, marketing specialists and seed scientists.”

Grow Ag Leaders is part of the overall America’s Farmers campaign, which highlights the vital role played by farmers, through programs designed to support rural communities. Farmers interested in promoting the program and endorsing students’ scholarship applications can learn how at GrowAgLeaders.com.

The scholarships are administered by the National FFA Organization, but FFA membership is not required to apply. Students have until Feb. 1, 2015 to complete the application online at FFA.org/scholarships.

Super weed! Fact or Fiction

Journalists like Paul Holis from South East Farm Press love a good buzzword or moniker – a “trending” name or nickname that can be used in place of a much more ordinary-sounding word or phrase.

For one thing, it’s just more fun to use such words. For another, it’s more likely to catch the attention of the reader, translating into a greater readership and the resulting increased number of “hits” on a website.

But there are admittedly cases where we simply use such a word to death. A case in point might well be the infamous “superweed.” Holis goes on to write about the subject.

Originally, I suppose it was a fairly good substitution for glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth pigweed. It certainly takes less time to write “superweed,” and it sounds sexier than the aforementioned technically accurate term.

But in recent years, we’ve overused it to the point to where no one’s really certain what “superweed” truly means. It has been used for a lot more than just glyphosate-resistant weeds, and therein lies the problem. “Superweed” makes for a swell headline, such as in “Superweeds Choke Farms,” but what does it really mean?

To help dispel some of the common misconceptions about superweeds, the Weed Science Society of America (WSSA) recently published an excellent fact sheet to clarify two common misconceptions about superweeds. The WSSA, if you don’t already know, is a non-profit organization that promotes science-based information about weeds, their impact on the environment, and how they can be managed.

While there is no science-based definition for superweed, the WSSA points out that the term is often used to describe weeds “believed to have special capabilities that are helping them outcompete other plants in ways never experienced before,” with many associating superweed with glyphosate-tolerant crops and the suspected transfer of resistance genes from these crops to weeds.

The first superweed misconception, according to the WSSA, is that rampant gene transfer between genetically modified crops and weeds is creating weeds able to resist treatment by herbicides.

In reality, states the fact sheet, there is no evidence that gene transfer is a major factor in the development of herbicide resistance. Instead, overreliance on herbicides with a single mechanism of action to control certain weeds has led to the selection of weeds resistant to that mechanism of action.

“The transfer of resistance traits from genetically modified crops to weeds growing in the field is rare, and the occurrences observed and reported to date have had minimal impact. The only currently known mechanism for any crop trait to move into weeds (or vice versa) is through cross pollination – a sexual crossing between the crop and the weed. Gene flow is more likely to happen if the crop and weed are sexually compatible, near relatives. Gene flow among more distantly related plant species is rare because they do not cross as readily. There are often physiological barriers, including pollen incompatibility, varying numbers of chromosomes and other factors that serve as impediments.”

Even among sexually compatible crops and weeds, states the WSSA, the opportunity for crop-weed gene flow depends on the proximity of the crop plant to its wild weedy relatives. For example, there have been no reports of gene transfer in the more than 160 million annually planted acres of genetically modified corn, cotton and soybean crops where herbicide resistance weeds are such a significant issue today. Since these crops don’t have sexually compatible, near relatives in the U.S. and Canada, the risk of gene flow to other plants in the region is extremely low.

The second major misconception, according to the WSSA, is that herbicide use is creating a new breed of herbicide-resistant superweeds unlike anything we’ve ever seen before.

“In reality, the costly issue of herbicide resistance isn’t new – and neither are the competitive characteristics of weeds. Although the number of acres affected by resistant weeds has increased over the last decade as more growers have come to rely solely on herbicides with a single mechanism of action for weed control, weeds have exhibited resistance to many types of herbicides over the past 40 years. Many weed populations have even evolved resistance to multiple herbicide mechanisms of action,” states the report.

Herbicide resistance is an important, costly and escalating issue, especially as growers have come to rely more than ever on a single class of herbicides that targets weeds in the same way, states the WSSA, and it is more critical than ever for a variety of carefully integrated weed management strategies to be used so weeds resistant to one method can be controlled in other ways before they have an opportunity to spread. This includes nonchemical means of weed control, such as crop rotation, tillage, cultivation, hand hoeing, seed capture, etc.

As to those super powers that many individuals ascribe to herbicide-resistant weeds? Under herbicide-free conditions, says the WSSA, resistant weeds are no more competitive or ecologically fit than their susceptible partners. Both can crowd out crops and other desirable plants by outcompeting them for water, nutrients, sunlight and space. They grow incessantly and can be prolific seed producers. A single Palmer amaranth plant, for example, can produce hundreds of thousands of seeds, regardless of whether it is herbicide resistant or not.

How to Reduce Risks for New Herbicide Resistant Plants

With all the new technology and herbicide resistant crops coming onto the market, there are risks of chemical application mishaps.  Farmers are being urged to use a free program to reduce those risks.

Agricultural engineer Dharmendra Saraswat from the University of Arkansas Division of Agricultural Cooperative Extension service helped develop the technology.  He recently spoke to Delta Farm Press about the new product.

On the program’s genesis:

“The flag the technology cloud (FTTCloud) program was launched last April, 2014, and is currently used by hundreds in Arkansas.

“The precursor to FTTCloud was initially launched in Clay County in 2010 -- but under a different name: Color Identifies the Field Technology (CIFT). Following the initial success, the program was launched statewide in 2011 and renamed ‘Flag the Technology.’ The changed name directly conveyed program’s focus on use of color coded flags to aid farmers in identifying which fields they are planting to what herbicide-tolerant technology.

Dicamba-tolerant crops soon to be a reality

“In subsequent years, Flag the Technology program also brought forth some unanticipated challenges. During the summertime, as farmers know very well, there are often gusts of wind. Those would sometimes pull the flags out of the ground and take them all over the place.

“In some cases, there were also mischievous people who would intentionally move the flags around.

“Obviously, movement of flags would be a cause of concern for chemical applicators. That’s perfectly understandable. ‘What if we rely on the flags and spray a product that injures the crop?’”

On the switch to a digital program…

“Due to these concerns we began considering how we could keep the program but ‘flag’ fields in a different way. In discussions with some county agents and forward-looking consultants and producers it was decided to launch a digital version of Flag the Technology program.

“The digital version doesn’t store any information on any of university servers. To provide quality experience to the current and potential users, the program has been hosted on a scalable cloud platform.

“The digital version, FTTCloud, retains the simplicity of its field-based precursor.

“Producers, consultants and chemical applicators can all participate after registering an account. The participation is voluntary. A registered producer can allow his/her consultant or chemical applicator to access complete information about entered fields by following certain protocol. The other registered users are provided essential information about herbicide technologies reported nearby or in the target field as new information is added to the program.

“Producers can either manually draw or upload field boundary data in shapefile format and then
interactively assign an individual field or a group of fields to herbicide-tolerant technology of their choice. The program assigns a color to the field based on selected technology. Fields with stacked technologies are also assigned colors, using a protocol slightly different from the field version of the program.

“The FTTCloud tool also allows users to identify other sensitive areas such as pumpkin patches, bee hives, fish ponds, vineyards etc., thereby not limiting its use to only those interested in row crops.

“Participation is free and the whole effort is being funded by the Arkansas Soybean Promotion Board.”

On the digital program savings…

“When using actual flags, fields require an average of five flags. That is at a cost of about $25. If someone has 100 fields in herbicide-tolerant technology, that means an expense of $2,500. However, use of FTTCloud program costs nothing.”

An estimate on how much crop damage has been reduced through the use of the flags?

“That’s a good question. The program is aimed at avoiding risks. An erroneous chemical application can almost ruin an entire field. So, you’re protecting a field that can be worth several thousand dollars to, in some cases, six figures.”

Enlist traits approved, Enlist herbicide next

On the safety of farmers’ data…

“Misuse of online information is an obvious fear in the minds of many and farmers are no exception. The FTTCloud program explicitly recognizes that all the information entered belongs to the producer. The university has no role in accessing it. The information is encrypted and then stored on the cloud platform.

“Towards the end of each year, we will send emails to those who registered an account. That will remind them to download their information for next year’s use. We don’t encourage archiving the information since the university wants to limit its role to providing educational means for chemical risk aversion.”

Farmland on Hulu

I'm sure by now you've heard of the documentary "Farmland" directed by Academy Award winning director James Moll.  Well, in case you missed it in the theater's, you can now watch it on Hulu.  Just click here to watch it.  I thought it was a very educational documentary for folks who know very little about modern day agriculture.  Enjoy.

The Return of Agent Orange?

The USDA recently approved a new technology which conveys resistance to 2,4-D and glyphosate herbicides in corn and soybeans.  The anti GMO crowd was, as usual, up in arms again.

Delta Farm Press recently covered this reaction.  Those whole believe farming should remain in the stone age reacted predictably.  Some even compared this technology to Agent Orange, a herbicide used in the Vietnam war and has been connected to cancer among vets.

Let's take a look at what Agent Orange was.  It was a mix of two herbicides, 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, with only the later associated with the negative impacts on health.  According to studies done by the National Pesticide Information Center, 2,4-D has not been implicated in any relationships between pesticide exposure and subsequent disease.

Despite all that information being out there, a New York Times reporter mentioned the Agent Orange connection.  This sent the anti GMO crowd into a frenzy.  Some news websites have even called it Agent Orange technology.

Fortunately there is science to calm everyone down.  Also, the USDA, EPA and farmers know better.  My hope is rational eventually takes over.  I understand peoples hesitance to this technology.  But it's unfounded.

Will this bring farming back to the "good old days"?  Where farmers could spray with impunity and no fear?  Far from it.  With all this new technology, farmers will have to make sure and spray properly and avoid as much drift as they can.  They will need to communicate better with their neighbor farmers on what they're doing and vice versa.

There will be lots of eyes watching this new technology.  And there are plenty of people out there who can't wait for something to go wrong.

Q&A with Monsanto CTO Robb Fraley

Robb Fraley, Monsanto chief technology officer, is excited about the future, but he's looking for new ways to explain new technology with non farmers.

Monsanto has been on a roll these days, as the St. Louis based firm integrates its recent acquisitions with existing seed and trait businesses.

The recent buying craze started with the purchase of Precision Plantation in May of 2012.  "It used to be seeds at planting would land on top of the field, others would land below where you wanted to plant them," Fraley, Monsanto's executive vice president and chief technology officer, said during a recent interview with Agriculture.com.  "Now, were talking about a planter precisely controlled by hydraulics, with picket fence stands occurring."

In 2013, Monsanto also expanded into biotechnology with a Novozymes collaboration, and extensive weather data with its acquisition of The Climate Corporation.

"We are seeing all these technologies starting to integrate together," he says.

Not all has gone smoothly however.  A simple Google search of Monsanto turns up groups like March Against Monsanto and Millions Against Monsanto.  Also, some weeds and corn rootworms are resisting the companies weed-resistant and insect-resistant technology.

The following is a Q&A between Fraley and Agriculture.com.

AG: What excites you?
RF: Microbials and biological.  We are in the early stages of how useful they will be, but we see applications for control of insects, weeds and viruses.

AG: Did weeds and insects that resist transgenic technology surprise Monsanto?
RF: From the day we launched Roundup Ready soybeans (in 1996), resistance was always on top of our minds as a possibility.  We are always testing the next generation product.  In the case of corn rootworm, the science moved quickly, and we were able to replace a single gene product with dual gene products with multiple modes of action.  We are expecting RNAi technology to come into the market by the end of the decade.  This will defer from the Bt technology now used in corn rootworm traits.

AG: What's the state of the U.S. regulatory system?
RF: It's getting more complicated.  We are seeing more delays.  The EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) that USDA requested dicamba (Monsanto) and 2,4-D tolerant soybeans (Dow AgroSciences) has added another two years onto the time these products can get to the market.  We are complying, but we didn't think it was necessary.  The last two products we launched in Brazil took just two years to get government approval.  We are able to launch Roundup Ready Xtend (dicamba-tolerant) soybeans in Argentina before we launch it here.

AG: Aren't there concerns, such as off-target movement, about these new weed control technologies?
RF: I understand there are concerns.  We and BASF are doing a lot of work in developing new formulations of dicamba.  Dow is doing the same thing with new formulations of 2,4-D.  These new formulations are incredible.  I remember as a kid spraying Banvel and seeing volatility and drift.  Newer formulations have dramatically decreased off-target movement.

AG: How is Monsanto working to ease concerns about genetically modified foods?
RF: We're making a bigger effort to talk with consumers - in schools, with moms, with people who like us and people who don't.  We need different approaches.

AG: What will you be talking about in five years?
RF: We will talk about how big of an enhancement Roundup Ready Xtend has made across soybean production.  It is a great new tool for weed control.  We will also be talking about adoption of probably the third or fourth generation of FieldScripts.  These will build upon products that select the right seed for the field and for planting at optimal populations.

Monsanto's New Roundup Ready in 2016

In 2016 you'll be able to use Monsanto's Roundup Ready Xtend Crop System for dicamba-tolerant soybeans.
Monsanto officials say they expect the USDA to give the all clear for the Roundup Ready by the years end.  However, Chinese approval for the system's soybeans won't be done by the the end of 2014.

"In the interest of stewardship, that will push us back for (Roundup Ready Xtend) soybeans to 2016 (pending regulatory approval)," says John Combest, a Monsanto spokesperson during a recent interview with Agriculture.com.  He said the farmers need to know that Roundup Ready Xtend soybeans will be able to be exported.  It's key to have China's approval first before introducing the product to farmers.

Monsanto originally planed on releasing the product in 2014.  That was before the USDA decided to have Animal and Plants Health Inspections Services (APHIS) launch two separate environmental impact statements (EIS) for traits that tolerate 2, 4-D and diacamba herbicides.

Dow AgroScience is still aiming for a 2015 release of its Enlist Weed Control System that includes soybeans tolerant 2, 4-D.  Just how large the scope and size of the release is up to the US approvals and import approvals from foreign nations.  Like the Roundup situation, China is a stickler for gaining import approvals of Enlist system components.

"There are still some approvals that need to be gained there," says Damon Palmer, Dow AgroSciences US commercial leader for Enlist.  That applies to other soybean systems as well as Enlists technology.  Authorities in Canada, Australia, Japan, Colombia, Taiwan, and Mexico have all cleared Enlist components for export.

Herbicide Resistant Weeds

South East Farm Press recently published an article about the damage herbicide resistant weeds can do.  A four year study by Weed Science shows how devastating a single herbicide resistant weed can be to a crop field.

The research covered fours years and four different fields of cotton in Arkansas.  In the study, 20,000 seeds of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth was released into a field and untreated and allowed to escape.

In one of the fields there was a total crop failure.  This shows the need for a zero-tolerance threshold when it comes to weed management.

Seeds can be spread by wind, water, animals and humans.  Seeds such as palmer amaranth can float on top of water causing it to spread rapidly in a field.  Palmer amaranth has prolific seed production rate, rapid dispersal and high competitiveness with crops making it very difficult to control.

In the Arkansas study, only glyphosate herbicide was used.  In the first season, a patch of Palmer amaranth grew 375 feet from the original planting location.  In the second season, the weed reached the field boundaries and infested 20 percent of the field area causing a significant yield decline.  By the third season, the weed had completely covered the field, making it impossible to plant any cotton.

This study easily shows how using only one form of herbicide can be ineffective when it comes to defending your farm from weeds, especially Palmer amaranth.  It also shows the need to keep all resistant weeds in a controlled area.  Weed control based on an economic threshold does not adequately consider the soil seed bank and the risk for herbicide resistance.